Perspective (from Latin perspicere, to see through) in the graphic arts, such as drawing, is an

approximate representation, on a flat surface (such as paper), of an image as it is seen by the eye. The
two most characteristic features of perspective are that objects are drawn:

 Smaller as their distance from the observer increases

 Foreshortened: the size of an object's dimensions along the line of sight are relatively shorter than
dimensions across the line of sight (see later).
Overview

A cube in two-point perspective.

Rays of light travel from the object, through the picture plane, and to the viewer's eye. This is the basis for graphical
perspective.

Linear perspective works by representing the light that passes from a scene through an imaginary
rectangle (the painting), to the viewer's eye. It is similar to a viewer looking through a window and painting
what is seen directly onto the windowpane. If viewed from the same spot as the windowpane was
painted, the painted image would be identical to what was seen through the unpainted window. Each
painted object in the scene is a flat, scaled down version of the object on the other side of the
window.[1] Because each portion of the painted object lies on the straight line from the viewer's eye to the
equivalent portion of the real object it represents, the viewer cannot perceive (sans depth perception) any
difference between the painted scene on the windowpane and the view of the real scene.
All perspective drawings assume a viewer is a certain distance away from the drawing. Objects are
scaled relative to that viewer. Additionally, an object is often not scaled evenly: a circle often appears as
an ellipse and a square can appear as a trapezoid. This distortion is referred to as foreshortening.

Perspective drawings typically have an -often implied- horizon line. This line, directly opposite the viewer's
eye, represents objects infinitely far away. They have shrunk, in the distance, to the infinitesimal
thickness of a line. It is analogous to (and named after) the Earth's horizon.

Any perspective representation of a scene that includes parallel lines has one or more vanishing points in
a perspective drawing. A one-point perspective drawing means that the drawing has a single vanishing
point, usually (though not necessarily) directly opposite the viewer's eye and usually (though not
necessarily) on the horizon line. All lines parallel with the viewer's line of sight recede to the horizon
towards this vanishing point. This is the standard "receding railroad tracks" phenomenon. A two-point
drawing would have lines parallel to two different angles. Any number of vanishing points are possible in
a drawing, one for each set of parallel lines that are at an angle relative to the plane of the drawing.

Perspectives consisting of many parallel lines are observed most often when drawing architecture
(architecture frequently uses lines parallel to the x, y, and z axes). Because it is rare to have a scene
consisting solely of lines parallel to the three Cartesian axes (x, y, and z), it is rare to see perspectives in
practice with only one, two, or three vanishing points; even a simple house frequently has a peaked roof
which results in a minimum of six sets of parallel lines, in turn corresponding to up to six vanishing points.

In contrast, natural scenes often do not have any sets of parallel lines. Such a perspective would thus
have no vanishing points.

History
Early history
The earliest art paintings and drawings typically sized objects and characters hieratically according to
their spiritual or thematic importance, not their distance from the viewer, and did not useforeshortening.
The most important figures are often shown as the highest in a composition, also from hieratic motives,
leading to the "vertical perspective", common in the art of Ancient Egypt, where a group of "nearer"
figures are shown below the larger figure or figures. The only method to indicate the relative position of
elements in the composition was by overlapping, of which much use is made in works like the Parthenon
Marbles.
15th century illustration from the Old French translation ofWilliam of Tyre's Histoire d'Outremer. There is clearly a general
attempt to reduce the size of more distant elements, but unsystematically. Sections of the composition are at a similar scale,
with relative distance shown by overlapping,foreshortening, and further objects being higher than nearer ones, though the
workmen at left do show finer adjustment of size. But this is abandoned on the right where the most important figure is much
larger than the mason. Rectangular buildings, and the blocks of stone are shown obliquely.

Systematic attempts to evolve a system of perspective are usually considered to have begun around the
5th century B.C. in the art of Ancient Greece, as part of a developing interest
in illusionism called skenographia, allied to theatrical scenery; using flat panels on a stage to give the
illusion of depth.[2] The philosophers Anaxagoras and Democritus worked out geometric theories of
perspective for use with skenographia.Alcibiades had paintings in his house designed based on
skenographia, thus this art was not confined merely to the stage. Euclid's Opticsintroduced a
mathematical theory of perspective; however, there is some debate over the extent to which Euclid's
perspective coincides with a modern mathematical definition of perspective.

By the later periods of antiquity artists, especially those in less popular traditions, were well aware that
distant objects could be shown smaller than those close at hand for increased illusionism, but whether
this convention was actually used in a work depended on many factors. Some of the paintings found in
the ruins of Pompeii show a remarkable realism and perspective for their time;[3] it has been claimed that
comprehensive systems of perspective were evolved in antiquity, but most scholars do not accept this.
Hardly any of the many works where such a system would have been used have survived. A passage
in Philostratus suggests that classical artists and theorists thought in terms of "circles" at equal distance
from the viewer, like a classical semi-circular theatre seen from the stage.[4] The roof beams in rooms in
the Vatican Virgil, from about 400CE, are shown converging, more or less, on a common vanishing point,
but this is not sytematically related to the rest of the composition. [5] In the Late Antique period use of
perspective techniques declined. The art of the new cultures of the Migration Period had no tradition of
attempting compositions of large numbers of figures and Early Medieval art was slow and inconsistent in
relearning the convention from classical models, though the process can be seen underway
in Carolingian art.

A clearly modern optical basis of perspective was given in 1021, when Alhazen, an Iraqi
physicist and mathematician, in his Book of Optics, explained that light projects conically into the eye.
This was, theoretically, enough to translate objects convincingly onto a painting, but Alhalzen was
concerned only with optics, not with painting. Conical translations are mathematically difficult, so a
drawing constructed using them would be incredibly time consuming.

Medieval art was aware of the general principle of varying the relative size of elements according to
distance, but even more than classical art was perfectly ready to overide it for other reasons. Buildings
were often shown obliquely according to a particular convention. The use and sophistication of attempts
to convey distance increased steadily during the period, but without a basis in a systematic
theory. Byzantine art was also aware of these principles, but also had the reverse perspective convention
for the setting of principal figures.

Giotto attempted drawings in perspective using an algebraic method to determine the placement of
distant lines. The problem with using a linear ratio in this manner is that the apparent distance between a
series of evenly spaced lines actually falls off with a sine dependence. To determine the ratio for each
succeeding line, a recursive ratio must be used.[6]

One of Giotto's first uses of his algebraic method of perspective was Jesus Before Caiaphas. Although
the picture does not conform to the modern, geometrical method of perspective, it does give a
considerable illusion of depth, and was a large step forward in Western art.

With the exception of dice[7], heraldry typically ignores perspective in the treatment of charges, though
sometimes in later centuries charges are specified as in perspective.
Perspective study of a vase by Paolo Uccello(Galleria degli Uffizi, Gabinetto dei Disegni)

Renaissance : Mathematical basis

One hundred years later, in about 1413, Filippo Brunelleschi demonstrated the geometrical method of
perspective, used today by artists, by painting the outlines of variousFlorentine buildings onto a mirror.
When the building's outline was continued, he noticed that all of the lines converged on the horizon line.
According to Vasari, he then set up a demonstration of his painting of the Baptistry in the incomplete
doorway of the Duomo. He had the viewer look through a small hole on the back of the painting, facing
the Baptistry. He would then set up a mirror, facing the viewer, which reflected his painting. To the viewer,
the painting of the Baptistry and the Baptistry itself were nearly indistinguishable.

Soon after, nearly every artist in Florence and in Italy used geometrical perspective in their
paintings,[8] notably Melozzo da Forlì and Donatello. Melozzo first used the perspective from down to
up (in Rome, Loreto, Forlì...), and was celebrated for that. Donatello started sculpting elaborate
checkerboard floors into the simple mangerportrayed in the birth of Christ. Although hardly historically
accurate, these checkerboard floors obeyed the primary laws of geometrical perspective: all lines
converged to a vanishing point, and the rate at which the horizontal lines receded into the distance was
graphically determined. This became an integral part of Quattrocento art. Not only was perspective a way
of showing depth, it was also a new method of composing a painting. Paintings began to show a single,
unified scene, rather than a combination of several.

Melozzo's usage of "down to up" perspective in hisfrescoes at Loreto.

Pietro Perugino's usage of perspective in this fresco at the Sistine Chapel (1481–82) helped bring the Renaissanceto Rome.

As shown by the quick proliferation of accurate perspective paintings in Florence, Brunelleschi likely
understood (with help from his friend the mathematician Toscanelli)[9], but did not publish, the
mathematics behind perspective. Decades later, his friend Leon Battista Alberti wrote De pictura/Della
Pittura (1435/1436), a treatise on proper methods of showing distance in painting. Alberti's primary
breakthrough was not to show the mathematics in terms of conical projections, as it actually appears to
the eye. Instead, he formulated the theory based on planar projections, or how the rays of light, passing
from the viewer's eye to the landscape, would strike the picture plane (the painting). He was then able to
calculate the apparent height of a distant object using two similar triangles. The mathematics behind
similar triangles is relatively simple, having been long ago formulated by Euclid. In viewing a wall, for
instance, the first triangle has a vertex at the user's eye, and vertices at the top and bottom of the wall.
The bottom of this triangle is the distance from the viewer to the wall. The second, similar triangle, has a
point at the viewer's eye, and has a length equal to the viewer's eye from the painting. The height of the
second triangle can then be determined through a simple ratio, as proven by Euclid.

Piero della Francesca elaborated on Della Pittura in his De Prospectiva Pingendi in 1474. Alberti had
limited himself to figures on the ground plane and giving an overall basis for perspective. Della Francesca
fleshed it out, explicitly covering solids in any area of the picture plane. Della Francesca also started the
now common practice of using illustrated figures to explain the mathematical concepts, making his
treatise easier to understand than Alberti's. Della Francesca was also the first to accurately draw
the Platonic solids as they would appear in perspective.

Perspective remained, for a while, the domain of Florence. Jan van Eyck, among others, was unable to
create a consistent structure for the converging lines in paintings, as in London's The Arnolfini Portrait,
because he was unaware of the theoretical breakthrough just then occurring in Italy. However he
achieved very subtle effects by manipulations of scale in his interiors. Gradually, and partly through the
movement of academiesof the arts, the Italian techniques became part of the training of artists across
Europe, and later other parts of the world.
Present : Computer graphics
3-D computer games and ray-tracers often use a modified version of perspective. Like the painter, the
computer program is generally not concerned with every ray of light that is in a scene. Instead, the
program simulates rays of light traveling backwards from the monitor (one for every pixel), and checks to
see what it hits. In this way, the program does not have to compute the trajectories of millions of rays of
light that pass from a light source, hit an object, and miss the viewer.

CAD software, and some computer games (especially games using 3-D polygons) use linear algebra, and
in particular matrix multiplication, to create a sense of perspective. The scene is a set of points, and these
points are projected to a plane (computer screen) in front of the view point (the viewer's eye). The
problem of perspective is simply finding the corresponding coordinates on the plane corresponding to the
points in the scene. By the theories of linear algebra, a matrix multiplication directly computes the desired
coordinates, thus bypassing any descriptive geometry theorems used in perspective drawing.

Types of perspective
Of the many types of perspective drawings, the most common categorizations of artificial perspective are
one-, two- and three-point. The names of these categories refer to the number of vanishing pointsin the
perspective drawing.

One-point perspective

One-Point Perspective.

One vanishing point is typically used for roads, railway tracks, or buildings viewed so that the front is
directly facing the viewer. Any objects that are made up of lines either directly parallel with the viewer's
line of sight or directly perpendicular (the railroad slats) can be represented with one-point perspective.

One-point perspective exists when the painting plate (also known as the picture plane) is parallel to two
axes of a rectilinear (or Cartesian) scene — a scene which is composed entirely of linear elements that
intersect only at right angles. If one axis is parallel with the picture plane, then all elements are either
parallel to the painting plate (either horizontally or vertically) or perpendicular to it. All elements that are
parallel to the painting plate are drawn as parallel lines. All elements that are perpendicular to the painting
plate converge at a single point (a vanishing point) on the horizon.
Some examples:

Two-point perspective

Two-Point Perspective.

Walls in 2-pt perspective.

Walls converge towards 2 vanishing points.
All vertical beams are parallel.
Model by "The Great One" from 3D Warehouse.
Rendered in SketchUp.

Two-point perspective can be used to draw the same objects as one-point perspective, rotated: looking at
the corner of a house, or looking at two forked roads shrink into the distance, for example. One point
represents one set of parallel lines, the other point represents the other. Looking at a house from the
corner, one wall would recede towards one vanishing point, the other wall would recede towards the
opposite vanishing point.

Two-point perspective exists when the painting plate is parallel to a Cartesian scene in one axis (usually
the z-axis) but not to the other two axes. If the scene being viewed consists solely of a cylinder sitting on
a horizontal plane, no difference exists in the image of the cylinder between a one-point and two-point
perspective.

Two-point perspective has one set of lines parallel to the picture plane and two sets oblique to it.Parallel
lines oblique to the picture plane converge to a vanishing point,which means that this set-up will require
two vanishing points.

Three-point perspective

Three-Point Perspective

Three-point perspective rendered from computer model by "Noel" from Google 3D Warehouse.
Rendered using IRender nXt.

Three-point perspective is usually used for buildings seen from above (or below). In addition to the two
vanishing points from before, one for each wall, there is now one for how those walls recede into the
ground. This third vanishing point will be below the ground. Looking up at a tall building is another
common example of the third vanishing point. This time the third vanishing point is high in space.

Three-point perspective exists when the perspective is a view of a Cartesian scene where the picture
plane is not parallel to any of the scene's three axes. Each of the three vanishing points corresponds with
one of the three axes of the scene. Image constructed using multiple vanishing points.

One-point, two-point, and three-point perspectives appear to embody different forms of calculated
perspective. The methods required to generate these perspectives by hand are different. Mathematically,
however, all three are identical: The difference is simply in the relative orientation of the rectilinear scene
to the viewer.

Zero-point perspective
Due to the fact that vanishing points exist only when parallel lines are present in the scene, a perspective
without any vanishing points ("zero-point" perspective) occurs if the viewer is observing a nonlinear
scene. The most common example of a nonlinear scene is a natural scene (e.g., a mountain range) which
frequently does not contain any parallel lines. A perspective without vanishing points can still create a
sense of "depth," as is clearly apparent in a photograph of a mountain range (more distant mountains
have smaller scale features).

Other varieties of linear perspective

One-point, two-point, and three-point perspective are dependent on the structure of the scene being
viewed. These only exist for strict Cartesian (rectilinear) scenes. By inserting into a Cartesian scene a set
of parallel lines that are not parallel to any of the three axes of the scene, a new distinct vanishing point is
created. Therefore, it is possible to have an infinite-point perspective if the scene being viewed is not a
Cartesian scene but instead consists of infinite pairs of parallel lines, where each pair is not parallel to
any other pair.

A: Non-perspective foreshortening, and B: Perspective foreshortening

Foreshortening
Foreshortening refers to the visual effect or optical illusion that an object or distance appears shorter than
it actually is because it is angled toward the viewer.

Although foreshortening is an important element in art where visual perspective is being depicted,
foreshortening occurs in other types of two-dimensional representations of three-dimensional scenes.
Some other types where foreshortening can occur include oblique parallel projection drawings.

Figure F1 shows two different projections of a stack of two cubes, illustrating oblique parallel projection
foreshortening ("A") and perspective foreshortening ("B").

Foreshortening is an effect which also occurs on American and Canadian automobile Wing mirrors,
see Objects in Mirror Are Closer Than They Appear.

Methods of construction

Several methods of constructing perspectives exist, including:

 Freehand sketching (common in art)

 Graphically constructing (once common in architecture)
 Using a perspective grid
 Computing a perspective transform (common in 3D computer applications)
 Mimicry using tools such as a proportional divider (sometimes called a variscaler)
Example

Rays of light travel from the eye to an object. Where those rays hit the picture plane, the object is drawn.

The rays of light drawn on the picture itself. The grey line on the left represents the picture plane. Where the blue line
intersects with this line, which is also the side of the red square, the back of the square is drawn.
One of the most common, and earliest, uses of geometrical perspective is a checkerboard floor. It is a
simple but striking application of one-point perspective. Many of the properties of perspective drawing are
used while drawing a checkerboard. The checkerboard floor is, essentially, just a combination of a series
of squares. Once a single square is drawn, it can be widened or subdivided into a checkerboard. Where
necessary, lines and points will be referred to by their colors in the diagram.

To draw a square in perspective, the artist starts by drawing a horizon line (black) and determining where
the vanishing point (green) should be. The higher up the horizon line is, the lower the viewer will appear
to be looking, and vice versa. The more off-center the vanishing point, the more tilted the square will be.
Because the square is made up of right angles, the vanishing point should be directly in the middle of the
horizon line. A rotated square is drawn using two-point perspective, with each set of parallel lines leading
to a different vanishing point.

The foremost edge of the (orange) square is drawn near the bottom of the painting. Because the viewer's
picture plane is parallel to the bottom of the square, this line is horizontal. Lines connecting each side of
the foremost edge to the vanishing point are drawn (in grey). These lines give the basic, one point
"railroad tracks" perspective. The closer it is the horizon line, the farther away it is from the viewer, and
the smaller it will appear. The farther away from the viewer it is, the closer it is to being perpendicular to
the picture plane.

A new point (the eye) is now chosen, on the horizon line, either to the left or right of the vanishing point.
The distance from this point to the vanishing point represents the distance of the viewer from the drawing.
If this point is very far from the vanishing point, the square will appear squashed, and far away. If it is
close, it will appear stretched out, as if it is very close to the viewer.

A line connecting this point to the opposite corner of the square is drawn. Where this (blue) line hits the
side of the square, a horizontal line is drawn, representing the farthest edge of the square. The line just
drawn represents the ray of light traveling from the farthest edge of the square to the viewer's eye. This
step is key to understanding perspective drawing. The light that passes through the picture plane
obviously can not be traced. Instead, lines that represent those rays of light are drawn on the picture
plane. In the case of the square, the side of the square also represents the picture plane (at an angle), so
there is a small shortcut: when the line hits the side of the square, it has also hit the appropriate spot in
the picture plane. The (blue) line is drawn to the opposite edge of the foremost edge because of another
shortcut: since all sides are the same length, the foremost edge can stand in for the side edge.

Original formulations used, instead of the side of the square, a vertical line to one side, representing the
picture plane. Each line drawn through this plane was identical to the line of sight from the viewer's eye to
the drawing, only rotated around the y-axis ninety degrees. It is, conceptually, an easier way of thinking of
perspective. It can be easily shown that both methods are mathematically identical, and result in the
same placement of the farthest side (see Panofsky).

Limitations
Plato was one of the first to discuss the problems of perspective. "Thus (through perspective) every sort
of confusion is revealed within us; and this is that weakness of the human mind on which the art of
conjuring and of deceiving by light and shadow and other ingenious devices imposes, having an effect
upon us like magic... And the arts of measuring and numbering and weighing come to the rescue of the
human understanding-there is the beauty of them --and the apparent greater or less, or more or heavier,
no longer have the mastery over us, but give way before calculation and measure and weight?" [10]

Satire on false perspective byHogarth.

Perspective images are calculated assuming a particular vanishing point. In order for the resulting image
to appear identical to the original scene, a viewer of the perspective must view the image from the exact
vantage point used in the calculations relative to the image. This cancels out what would appear to be
distortions in the image when viewed from a different point. These apparent distortions are more
pronounced away from the center of the image as the angle between a projected ray (from the scene to
the eye) becomes more acute relative to the picture plane. In practice, unless the viewer chooses an
extreme angle, like looking at it from the bottom corner of the window, the perspective normally looks
more or less correct. This is referred to as "Zeeman's Paradox." [11] It has been suggested that a drawing
in perspective still seems to be in perspective at other spots because we still perceive it as a drawing,
because it lacks depth of field cues.[12]

For a typical perspective, however, the field of view is narrow enough (often only 60 degrees) that the
distortions are similarly minimal enough that the image can be viewed from a point other than the actual
calculated vantage point without appearing significantly distorted. When a larger angle of view is required,
the standard method of projecting rays onto a flat picture plane becomes impractical. As a theoretical
maximum, the field of view of a flat picture plane must be less than 180 degrees (as the field of view
increases towards 180 degrees, the required breadth of the picture plane approaches infinity).

In order to create a projected ray image with a large field of view, one can project the image onto a
curved surface. In order to have a large field of view horizontally in the image, a surface that is a vertical
cylinder (i.e., the axis of the cylinder is parallel to the z-axis) will suffice (similarly, if the desired large field
of view is only in the vertical direction of the image, a horizontal cylinder will suffice). A cylindrical picture
surface will allow for a projected ray image up to a full 360 degrees in either the horizontal or vertical
dimension of the perspective image (depending on the orientation of the cylinder). In the same way, by
using a spherical picture surface, the field of view can be a full 360 degrees in any direction (note that for
a spherical surface, all projected rays from the scene to the eye intersect the surface at a right angle).

Just as a standard perspective image must be viewed from the calculated vantage point for the image to
appear identical to the true scene, a projected image onto a cylinder or sphere must likewise be viewed
from the calculated vantage point for it to be precisely identical to the original scene. If an image projected
onto a cylindrical surface is "unrolled" into a flat image, different types of distortions occur: For example,
many of the scene's straight lines will be drawn as curves. An image projected onto a spherical surface
can be flattened in various ways, including:

 an image equivalent to an unrolled cylinder

 a portion of the sphere can be flattened into an image equivalent to a standard perspective
 an image similar to a fisheye photograph